Regarding the Eurocentricity of Esperanto, this from the Wikipedia article on Esperanto: "Speakers are most numerous in Europe and East Asia, especially in urban areas, where they often form Esperanto clubs. Esperanto is particularly prevalent in the northern and central countries of Europe; in China, Korea, Japan, and Iran within Asia; in Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico in the Americas; and in Togo in Africa."
Yes, it is a European-derived constructed language, but anecdotal evidence that I have come across says that East Asians enjoy a "European" language that is regular syntactically and grammatically.

Esperanto is a superb second language because 1) people use it in nearly every country of the world 2) it symbolizes compromise, people are not pushing their cultures onto each other (a cause for considerable conflict) 3) Fluent Esperanto speakers will assist long term visitors in learning a third language. 4) It will facilitate literacy in huge areas of the world where illiteracy reigns. 5. Esperanto's eurocentricity??? What about English's Eurocentricity?

In computing, new programming languages are being created every day. The advantage is obvious - no more writing pages and pages of code for a simple program. And i hardly think anybody misses the good old days of FORTRAN and COBOL, everyone's quite happy to move on.
Likewise any new language must be easy to learn and to teach. It would be no surprise if in the future English is replaced by another universal language and all the existing languages will be confined to the history books.

I believed the same many years ago, during my last year at high school, not so much now. Nowa I tend to believe that the most widespread and common languages will undergo a progressive simplification. In fact, in some languages this process already started decades ago. For instance, in Mandarin Chinese there has been a structural simplification of character forms and a reduction in the total number characters in order to facilitate its typography, printing, and encourage the increase in literacy, the so called Simplified Chinese characters. English could undergo an analogue process in the future with a simplification of its spelling, pronunciation, and homogenization of its grammatical irregularities.

The reality is children don't learn langage as much as re-invent it as they grow up together. Cobble together a simple system, and if taken up, humans will put all sorts of things into it to spice life up.

As for computer languages du jour, I get tired of them. 99% of which share a C like syntax, and OO traits, and a further 99% repeated functionality, but with the names changed to annoy the programmer.

I don't believe we will ever have universal language. It's always been the language of the country that is politically and economically dominant. Besides, people always have this you-have-to-learn-my-language mentality.

I don't think that the Eurocentricity is what hinders the use of Esperanto as the source of a root word matters much less than how much you can do with it once you've learned it.
Esperanto is a word-building miracle. Whether or not you recognise the root word "breto" (shelf) or "table" (table), you can use the root to make dozens of related words.
The problem has been simply that few people want to speak a language that no-one speaks, and only some people want to speak a language few people speak... It is a problem resolving itself as opportunities to learn diversify on the internet and, more importantly, as the internet facilitates contact between speakers in every inhabited continent on Earth.

Start with a surplus of extremely well-educated postgraduate linguistics specialists with a love of their subject.

Add the determination (no less real for being limited to the time-span of filming) of the typical director that the product appear "authentic".

Add the tendency of actors to immerse themselves in a role via method-acting.

Sprinkle liberally with money.

Leave to stand for a couple of months.

I think it's quite wonderful. The writer of the "Game of Thrones" series, George R. Martin, is getting on, and the progress of new books has slowed. It seems unlikely the series will ever be finished by its original creator.

Some people are very enthusiastic about languages, enjoy learning about them, and think a lot about language structure. To many of those people, and to many others as well, the clear meaninglessness of most "mumbo-jumbo" is distracting when one is trying to get immersed in a story. Creating a language is a lot of work, and it's not necessary, but it sure is fun!

Propter arti, pro arti - however the Romans would have written it, "for the sake of art".

If you need the sake of art explained, or how it overrides economic efficiency, then you need to have a look at the achievements of civilisation and how interesting a world with nothing but money would be.

If you need how language can be art explained, you need to have a look at why poetry, literature, film, song, jokes, and so many other manipulations of our spoken communication system are so popular.

If you can't make the connection between the above, and a constructed language, then don't trouble yourself, just remind yourself that other people like it, and so those who like it and want to share it with others who like it should very well be able to do so.

Speaking of mumbo-jumbo, why can't the writers of sci-fi shows write some plausible-sounding scientific dialog? It's as if they just come to various points in their script and write "ad-lib sciency jargon here", and we get some blather about disencabulating the quantum field drive before the energy vortex deframulates.

You want a language to speak to the whole world, one that you can learn and pronounce without breaking your tounge, one that you can write with no strange characters, with defined grammar, lots of vocabulary and structure???
why do you invest time and money creating a new language when you have LATIN???
once, the world's official language, lots of people know it and can teach it. Remember that for centuries every work of science, politics, religion was written in latin for everyone (who knew how to read) could read it. Don't waste time, return to latin and be happy.

Latin is extremely complicated compared to many languages spoken now. There's loads of inflection, tenses etc. English does a great job at communication but you probably don't realize how much simpler than Latin it is. We don't need that complicated a system. I know what I'm talking about, I studied Latin for years.

Esperanto is even simpler than English and works really well. More people are fluent in Esperanto now than in Latin too. I could have a conversation in Esperanto after learning it for two weeks. I've been learning for a couple of months now and I can have extended and complex conversations that while not perfect grammar- and vocabulary-wise get my meaning across. It's also helped me improve my German in a way that taking German for four years never did...

We're lucky anyone can speak English properly - it's the most difficult language to learn, with more words than any other language by far as well as irregular spelling, a host of foreign loan words and idiomatic expressions from diverse cultural influences.

English has lots of words because it (especially American English) has borrowed words, and even phrases, from anywhere and everywhere. On the other hand, you can be comprehensible, and even sound reasonably educated, without knowing anything like the whole vocabulary. Indeed, nobody has command of anything like the entire English vocabulary.

It always cracks me up when people say english is the most difficult language to learn - you must be a native speaker! Only people whose native tongue is english claim that it is the most difficult language, nobody who actually had to study it as a foreign language would ever say that - because it truely is not!

English is exceptionally easy to learn and master in a communicable form. There are no genders, very simple verb agreement rules and no more irregularities than most European languages. On the other hand the spelling is very inconsistent so accurate pronunciation and spelling can be challenging. However I can't think of many (any?) easier languages to learn to be able to communicate in.